[C. J. REAKES.

L—lob.

56

with the proverbial result. I need not say much with regard to the utilization of offal beyond stating that my own observations confirm the evidence given by Mr. Milne that the freezing companies here an- veuy efficient in dealing with that question. If they do not use their offal to the same minutedegree as do all the American companies it is because the market conditions are not suitable for it. In conclusion, 1 would specially call attention to seime- information furnished in an official despatch received prior tei the; war, and emanating from a very high source. It is as follows :"It is clear that the Chicago beef interests are' obtaining complete control of the Argentine industry, and any interruption of the Australian and New Zealand supply will enable them definitely to consolidate their position in the Argentine-, leaving them free to deal with Australia and New Zealand at their leisure. It seems to be established beyond doubt that their intention is to obtain control e>!' the: world's meatsupply." The warning contained in the concluding sentence cannot In- disregarded. Mr. Field : Do I understand that this petition represents only 300,000 sheep? That is so; if anything, le;ss than that number. Not more than one-tenth of the total sheep hole! in the country ?—-There are approximately 25,000,000 slu'e'p in the country, Mr. Jones : The' first ten names on the petition re-present 200,000 sheep ?- -Not according to the figures in the sheep returns. Mr, Field : Did you take the trouble to check the correctness of that statement that the first ten names in tho petition represent 200,000 sheep I -Yes, it was checked by the sheep returns. Do the sheep returns show the statement to be accurate ? —There were a few names which could not lie traced in the sheep returns. In regard to the- question of c.i.f. buying, do you not think there is some danger to be feared from allowing buying on the: hoof or on the hooks ? —No, not so direct. If you have buyers actually operating at the fat-stock sales, there is a greater danger of their squeezing out their competitors than if they are only buying the finished article--frozen meat. But if these people have such enormous capital could not they collar the whole of the markets of the world ? —lf they control all the ships and all the meat they could, but that is beyond our power to prevent. It is within our power to prevent them from entering into the internal trade of the country. I would like tei have your opinion as to tho existence or otherwise in New Zealand of combinations of freezing companies to fix prices ? —I could not say that any combination of that sort exists here at the present time. From time to time during the past few years there have been differences between producers and freezing companies, and 1 have: personally made inquiries into some of them, but of late they have been principally due to shortage of space and consequent restricted buying. I know there have been instances where storage space has been held by individuals or firms who havepractically felt themselves for the time being in the position of being able tei compete advantageously against people who had no storage space. It has been stated that freezing companies have made 100 per cent, profit in one year : have you any knowledge of that ?—No. But there is one point to bo remembered : The profits made during any one year cannot be taken to illustrate the average annual earning-power of any company. The freezing companies have been well paid in the matter of storage rates, which the Imperial Government have paid. In addition their market for by-products such as hides, pelts, and tallow has been a ve:ry erratic one. At one time within the last three: years there were enormous quantitie-s of pelts piling up in the freezing-works, and also tallow. Then, when they wore able later to get shipment and sell their pelts and tallow on a very high market they made: a lot of money out of them. It happened that the market went up at the right time. Then your opinion is that we should keep out the American companies and deal with our own evils in our own way ? —Undoubtedly. Mr. Lysnar : If it is shown that there is any combination here, yem say that it would be, better to legislate'to deal with that trouble rather than allow the outside octopus to come in ? —Undoubtedly, if our existing legislation is not sufficient. But our legislation gives great power to the Government in that direction. But if it wore proved defective you would suggest that further powers should be taken ?—Yes. You were asked the number of stock in the Argentine : will you let the Committee have; those figures?- -In 1914 there were 43,225,000 sheep in the Argentine, and in 1918 44,850,000. In 1911 there were: 25,865,000 cattle, and in 1918 27,050,000. Those figures are from the Prices Current .Journal Year-book for 1919, evidently a consolidation of the statistics of different countries. You referred to the trusts and the danger of Armour and Co. getting hold of the: distributingmarkets : do you think that is a very real danger ? —Yes, quite a real danger. And if they ultimately get control of the distributing-markets they would control this end indirectly ?—That is so. You said that the British market was our stable market and the American market was a doubtful one : is there not also this reason, that the American market is more likely to be manipulated than the English market ? The American market is in the: peiwer of the trust controlling the distributing trade- ? Yes, largely, but we have to watch the British market as well from that point of view. But, still, they have not the same dominating control on the English marki't as they have in the American market ? —No. You wemld say that it is to the interests of the farmers to assist with competition rather than to assist the packers ? —From the point of view of the: farmers, the larger the number of the' right sort of buye:rs —individuals not so enormously wealthy as to be able to manipulate the market—the better. , . . Mr. J. R. Hamilton: You stated that the whole of your remarks and opinions regarding Armour and Co. referred to Armour and Co. of Chicago and not to Armour and Co. (Australasia) ?--- Yes, seeing that the American official reports mention Armour and Co. (Australasia) as being a subsidiary company of Armour and. Co. of Chicago. You quoted a certain period when the prices in America compared favourably with the prices in New Zealand, but your quotation covered one year only—or two: what about the intervening period ? Is it not a fact that the prices may be in favour of America this year and. in favour of New Zealand